Skip to content

Mod challenge: find me ten good PB threads from ten permabanned players

KFCeytron··6 votes·6,245 views

A permaban for a toxic player indicates that Riot no longer believes that player capable of reform. Punishments didn't prompt self-reflection, warnings of losing the account were ignored, all the toxic behavior was rationalized with a variety of terrible arguments. Did more than four punishments do the trick for some people? Yes, but this was very infrequent, and not worth the damage caused by all the consistently toxic players who didn't learn and were allowed to keep playing. Riot doesn't believe a permabanned player will improve, and they're not interested in letting them try. Riot wants those players to leave.

These people who are unable to follow rules and behave themselves then go onto the Boards and start insisting that their ban was unjust, and any other player's permaban was unjust, and the number of reports matters, and someone else started it, and so on. When someone disagrees with them, they start to demonstrate why they got a permaban in the first place: poor behavior. They pollute the place with bad ideas, bad advice, and uncivil discourse. Sometimes permabanned players post on each other's threads to show support for misbehavior, like a bunch of convicts banging their tin cups against the bars. What's the point of discussing their ban, anyway? It's permanent, and Riot wants those people to quit the game.

Even now there is a highly-upvoted thread on the front page about how permabans for toxic chat are bad because permabanned players just make new accounts anyway, and how a clever and novel solution would be... stacking chat restrictions. This was posted, of course, by a player who was permabanned for toxic chat and isn't happy about being punished. They have no problem with breaking the rules and annoying people; they just don't like it when something bad happens to them. Note that most permabanned players don't keep playing, and Riot tried stacking chat restrictions but it didn't work and just produced more toxic behavior that was more difficult to detect. The thread is selfish and poorly-researched. And yet, it has tons of upvotes, currently at 71-24, with a poll at 179-59. But you look at the comments and see half a dozen players - all relentlessly toxic and permabanned - insisting that this is a good idea and they shouldn't have been permabanned and it was a setup and it was all the other guy's fault and so on and so on with all the same trash they always spew because they're basically sociopaths. Harsh, but I'm not mincing words here. And most of them say they have a giant pile of smurf accounts. Now let's do some math: a few toxic players multiplied by a giant pile of smurf accounts each... what do you know! That's how many upvotes this thread has. It's an obvious example of vote manipulation, bringing a demonstrably useless thread (the idea has been tried and proven ineffective, remember) to the forefront.

This brings us to my challenge to mods. Genesis 18-19 is the well-known story about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Abraham convinced God to spare these sinful cities if they contained a mere ten righteous people. Unfortunately, there weren't any, and the cities were destroyed.

If you can find me ten separate Player Behavior threads by ten separate permabanned players where the player asked about their ban, behaved themselves, learned, thanked respondents for teaching them the error of their ways, improved their behavior, reformed, and became an upstanding player/member of the community (flying in the face of Riot's real-world data, mind you), then I will at least be willing to entertain the idea that perhaps those extraordinary cases are worth the absolutely massive amount of chaff. We're paying a cost, so there should be some benefit. But if you can't, then I urge you to stop allowing permabanned toxic assholes to trash that Board, and just instantly delete any thread or comment in PB posted by a permabanned player. Don't permaban them from Boards entirely; just remove anything they post in PB.

Note that I'm not just talking about threads that weren't quite bad enough for mods to lock/delete, because that almost never happens even when it obviously should. I'm talking about threads that are actually good and useful from permabanned players.

If nothing else, the time period covered by ten such posts should show us how often we see such a chimera around here, and perhaps make a case for much stricter moderation on low-quality content from players who are already known to specialize in such.

Ten separate threads, ten separate permabanned players, ten separate success stories.

34 Comments

ModThe Djinn4 votes
  1. A player who got a permanent ban while on a 14-day ban posts a reasonable thread inquiring about it.
  2. A player with 31 banned accounts legitimately seeks help with how to manage his mental state in games.
  3. A player puzzled about a permanent ban takes feedback gracefully
  4. A player with 5+ banned accounts finally reaches Honor 3 and feels great about it.
  5. A player makes a heartfelt apology to the community and seems to have learned a lesson.
  6. A player apologizes and uses himself/herself as a warning to others that the cost of losing your account/progress isn't worth the price.
  7. A player realizes their ban was justified and their multiple tickets to Riot were the result of anger and obsession, and makes a public apology.
  8. A player with multiple accounts banned and a punishment on the current one manages to get back to Honor 1, and feels great about it.
  9. A player acknowledges their own problems and looks for a space to put their thoughts to text and get some helpful feedback.
  10. [Removed] Apologies -- this last one didn't meet your specific criteria for a perma-banned player showing reform upon my second check, but I can't be bothered to use the awkward tools at my disposal (see below) to keep looking, because I feel at this point I've proven it sufficiently.

The only reason this was remotely tricky is that there isn't a way to check from the thread title if a player is banned or not (and some players don't mention if they were ever banned), and the TOP post option is no longer on Player Behavior. If it weren't for those two factors this would have taken less than the 10 minutes or so it actually took.

Umbral Regent2 votes

A banned player presents a straight-forward and respectfully presented argument for a change to the system. Apologies -- this last one doesn't meet your specific criteria for a perma-banned player showing reform, but I can't be bothered to use the awkward tools at my disposal (see below) to keep looking, because I feel at this point I've proven it sufficiently.

I've got at least one example of a permabanned player showing reform, alongside one case of a permabanned player generally accepting their punishment and putting forward a worthwhile discussion despite it.

  1. A player opens a discussion following their second permanent ban, asking the community for tips and advice on how to avoid tilting, flaming, and controlling anger.

And for bonus points, a permabanned player suggesting changes to the punishment system - not perfect, but still a positive discussion.

ModThe Djinn1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=qjasOEbd,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2019-08-27T13:10:44.246+0000)

I've got at least one example of a permabanned player showing reform, alongside one case of a permabanned player generally accepting their punishment and putting forward a worthwhile discussion despite it.

  1. A player opens a discussion following their second permanent ban, asking the community for tips and advice on how to avoid tilting, flaming, and controlling anger.

And for bonus points, a permabanned player suggesting changes to the punishment system - not perfect, but still a positive discussion.

Thanks for the tag-in!

KFCeytron1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=qjasOEbd,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2019-08-27T13:10:44.246+0000)

I've got at least one example of a permabanned player showing reform, alongside one case of a permabanned player generally accepting their punishment and putting forward a worthwhile discussion despite it.

  1. A player opens a discussion following their second permanent ban, asking the community for tips and advice on how to avoid tilting, flaming, and controlling anger.

And for bonus points, a permabanned player suggesting changes to the punishment system - not perfect, but still a positive discussion.

I'll take that ten as a replacement for The Djinn's missing tenth.

The bonus point is not only imperfect, it's a flat-out "no." Threads from permabanned players who want to keep interacting with the community they've been permanently banned from for a chance to "prove" themselves when they already had several such chances are a dime a dozen. Every time Riot actually gives something like that the benefit of the doubt and tries it, it blows up in their face as the permabanned toxic players who are allowed back into their accounts quickly return to their old habits (hence the reason that they were permabanned in the first place).

Umbral Regent1 votes

The bonus point is not only imperfect, it's a flat-out "no." Threads from permabanned players who want to keep interacting with the community they've been permanently banned from for a chance to "prove" themselves when they already had several such chances are a dime a dozen. Every time Riot actually gives something like that the benefit of the doubt and tries it, it blows up in their face as the permabanned toxic players who are allowed back into their accounts quickly return to their old habits (hence the reason that they were permabanned in the first place).

The point of the bonus thread was that permabanned players, even with shortsighted or hopeful suggestions that would allow permabanned players back, can still create worthwhile topics of discussion. Riot needn't really consider their suggestions, but the fact remains that even with unrepentant suggestions that try to enable toxic players to return after a permaban, there can still be some worthwhile stuff to discuss.

Which, in my opinion, is even more reason to allow permabanned players their voice on PB. There may certainly be a lot of the same suggestions tossed about, but there's always a chance that something interesting will crop up.

KFCeytron1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=qjasOEbd,comment-id=0003000000010000,timestamp=2019-08-27T13:40:44.729+0000)

The point of the bonus thread was that permabanned players, even with shortsighted or hopeful suggestions that would allow permabanned players back, can still create worthwhile topics of discussion. Riot needn't really consider their suggestions, but the fact remains that even with unrepentant suggestions that try to enable toxic players to return after a permaban, there can still be some worthwhile stuff to discuss.

Which, in my opinion, is even more reason to allow permabanned players their voice on PB. There may certainly be a lot of the same suggestions tossed about, but there's always a chance that something interesting will crop up.

That wasn't a discussion. It was an echo chamber. I still think that kid needs to discuss their issues with their parents.

Some discussions and voices are good to have at least once... but not more than once. There's a reason I now have a copypasta file to respond to PB threads.

Umbral Regent1 votes

That wasn't a discussion. It was an echo chamber. I still think that kid needs to discuss their issues with their parents.

I have a feeling we're talking about two separate threads here. The "bonus point" thread may have had some generally bad ideas (largely due to them orienting around overturning permabans), but it wasn't really an echo chamber. The OP only really participated in one comment string, and seemed both amicable and willing to accept disagreement.

Some discussions and voices are good to have at least once... but not more than once. There's a reason I now have a copypasta file to respond to PB threads.

I should point you, then, to the Player Behavior Board Rules.

Don't Be a Robot

We see a lot of the same questions over and over in Player Behavior, which leads to the habit of copy/paste answers. Responding to people in this way can feel cold and dismissive. If you choose to use scripts, you should also include something that is specific to that request.

I've noticed your C/P responses, and while I haven't personally read through the bulk of them to see if there was anything non-C/P about them, it's still worth pointing out that those should be avoided.

It's good to be prepared for any occasion and all, but there's a point where being prepared can become detrimental to the quality of discussion on the board.

KFCeytron1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=qjasOEbd,comment-id=000300000001000000000000,timestamp=2019-08-27T14:01:05.872+0000)

I have a feeling we're talking about two separate threads here. The "bonus point" thread may have had some generally bad ideas (largely due to them orienting around overturning permabans), but it wasn't really an echo chamber. The OP only really participated in one comment string, and seemed both amicable and willing to accept disagreement.

I should point you, then, to the Player Behavior Board Rules.

I've noticed your C/P responses, and while I haven't personally read through the bulk of them to see if there was anything non-C/P about them, it's still worth pointing out that those should be avoided.

It's good to be prepared for any occasion and all, but there's a point where being prepared can become detrimental to the quality of discussion on the board.

I see. That's a stupid rule, because the same questions deserve the same answers and there's no need to waste time rewriting it every time. It's better than "PB bingo," anyway, which is the reason I started using C/P in the first place. Seemed a lot more useful. I will be making a thread about that shortly, although I'm sure it will be downvoted by players who feel that just because they called their teammates braindead idiots five games in a row doesn't mean they don't deserve hours of someone's time.

KFCeytron1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=qjasOEbd,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-08-27T12:54:28.141+0000)

  1. A player who got a permanent ban while on a 14-day ban posts a reasonable thread inquiring about it.
  2. A player with 31 banned accounts legitimately seeks help with how to manage his mental state in games.
  3. A player puzzled about a permanent ban takes feedback gracefully
  4. A player with 5+ banned accounts finally reaches Honor 3 and feels great about it.
  5. A player makes a heartfelt apology to the community and seems to have learned a lesson.
  6. A player apologizes and uses himself/herself as a warning to others that the cost of losing your account/progress isn't worth the price.
  7. A player realizes their ban was justified and their multiple tickets to Riot were the result of anger and obsession, and makes a public apology.
  8. A player with multiple accounts banned and a punishment on the current one manages to get back to Honor 1, and feels great about it.
  9. A player acknowledges their own problems and looks for a space to put their thoughts to text and get some helpful feedback.
  10. [Removed] Apologies -- this last one didn't meet your specific criteria for a perma-banned player showing reform upon my second check, but I can't be bothered to use the awkward tools at my disposal (see below) to keep looking, because I feel at this point I've proven it sufficiently.

The only reason this was remotely tricky is that there isn't a way to check from the thread title if a player is banned or not (and some players don't mention if they were ever banned), and the TOP post option is no longer on Player Behavior. If it weren't for those two factors this would have taken less than the 10 minutes or so it actually took.

  1. a month ago
  2. deleted
  3. two months ago
  4. two months ago
  5. three months ago
  6. three months ago
  7. four months ago
  8. five months ago
  9. six months ago
  10. none

Eight in six months.

I will assume that the deleted one was deleted because the OP had a very good, non-toxic reason for removing it, not because it was a toxic thread removed by a mod.

I'll substitute the first thread suggested by Umbral Regent below for number 10.

I suppose this is just barely enough to almost count with the assumption and the substitution. Let's table that brimstone. :D

However, PB is still a cesspool, and I stand by that observation.

P.S.: Any plans on removing/locking that vote-botted thread?

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}Eight in six months.

Second one was a link error rather than a deletion, so that's 9 in six months, found in ten minutes using a bad search interface. I have neither the time nor the desire to further prove what I know to be true to you. You are also welcome move the goalposts of your original request by including timelines or assuming I picked everything in chronological order rather if you like (rather than primarily basing my search on upvoted threads with reasonable titles to save myself time spent reading), but the fact is that permanently banned players do make good threads and have success stories.

P.S.: Any plans on removing/locking that vote-botted thread?

I don't know what thread you're talking about myself, and typically vote-botting is something that is both hard to confirm and rarely actually worth stepping in unless it's causing a real problem.

KFCeytron1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=qjasOEbd,comment-id=000300010000,timestamp=2019-08-27T13:27:29.459+0000)

Second one was a link error rather than a deletion, so that's 9 in six months, found in ten minutes using a bad search interface. You can make excuses if you like, but the fact is that permanently banned players do make good threads and have success stories.

I don't know what thread you're talking about myself, and typically vote-botting is something that is both hard to confirm and rarely actually worth stepping in unless it's causing a real problem.

??

I'm not making excuses. I assumed that it worked. But now that I can visit the link, I counter that that was not a good example of a positive thread. The OP is a child (15) who has over 30 permabans and yet believes that all their misbehavior is the game's fault because they're a fantastic person who gets little social interaction and is "prone to snappping at people who provoke [them]" but only rages in game because "when [the] jungler is truly useless" it provokes "provokes [their] flaming." I was in that thread. It was not positive. There was no growth, only denial and severe RL social issues.

Vote-botted "stacking chat restrictions are the answer" thread: https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/7RTLWEuK-an-long-essay-on-permabans-one-size-fits-all-policies-dont-work

ModThe Djinn1 votes

{quoted}There was no growth, only denial and severe RL social issues.

How you react to a player matters. My own interaction with the OP in that thread was one where, to me, it seemed the OP took the feedback. Pushing back slightly is both allowed and a part of growth. The player asked for in-game advice, and so I provided in-game advice. It's not really our place to assume, as you suggested, "You don't need League-specific advice; you need skills and strategies to help you cope with other people who may or may not meet your expectations, because everyone needs to deal with that throughout their life, at least occasionally."

Vote-botted "stacking chat restrictions are the answer" thread: https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/7RTLWEuK-an-long-essay-on-permabans-one-size-fits-all-policies-dont-work

I'm not convinced that's a vote-botted thread (it's surprisingly well presented for suggestions like that, and could also simply have been shared other places). As the discussion doesn't seem overly problematic (save a few comments I believe are in the report queue), I don't think there's much to be gained from assuming manipulation and locking it.

KFCeytron1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=qjasOEbd,comment-id=00030001000000000000,timestamp=2019-08-27T13:54:24.186+0000)

How you react to a player matters. My own interaction with the OP in that thread was one where, to me, it seemed the OP took the feedback. Pushing back slightly is both allowed and a part of growth. The player asked for in-game advice, and so I provided in-game advice. It's not really our place to assume, as you suggested, "You don't need League-specific advice; you need skills and strategies to help you cope with other people who may or may not meet your expectations, because everyone needs to deal with that throughout their life, at least occasionally."

I'm not convinced that's a vote-botted thread (it's surprisingly well presented for suggestions like that, and could also simply have been shared other places). As the discussion doesn't seem overly problematic (save a few comments I believe are in the report queue), I don't think there's much to be gained from assuming manipulation and locking it.

So, feedback that fed OP's confirmation bias was positive and good, while my feedback that didn't was bad? I didn't assume anything. OP flat-out said that they rarely have social interactions, and when they do they tend to snap at people. That's a pretty clear issue not limited to League. And yet, OP thinks that League is the problem because their RL behavior is fine.

Man, there are like half a dozen commenters, half of them saying "this is a bad idea because it's been proven not to work," and the other half saying "my 20 permabanned accounts and I think this is genius." It's not hard to put two and two together. If I was a mod, voting on that thread would've been locked in the first few minutes after it got its initial pile of votes.

ModThe Djinn1 votes

{quoted}So, feedback that fed OP&'s confirmation bias was positive and good, while my feedback that didn't was bad?

Not necessarily. More that feedback that a player isn't ready to hear can often cause them to push back more, and it's not really our job to play therapist to players unless that's what they request.

Cind3rkick3 votes

Or... They couldn't do that because it's pointless looking for 10 specific posts just for the sake of one person ...

KFCeytron3 votes

{quoted}

Or... They couldn't do that because it's pointless looking for 10 specific posts just for the sake of one person ...

But there's a point in allowing toxic players to trash the Boards just for the sake of a handful of people who just needed that one more punishment to reform? You think you're disagreeing with me, but you're actually supporting what I'm saying. :)

Cind3rkick1 votes

So you are saying that it makes sense that people should look for 10 specific things in a history of millions just for the sake of 1 persons curiosity?

I don't knkw what I'm supposedly dissagreeing /agreeing with beyond the fact that mods should look for 10 posts from permbanned pekple that was positive

KFCeytron3 votes

{quoted}

So you are saying that it makes sense that people should look for 10 specific things in a history of millions just for the sake of 1 persons curiosity?

I don't knkw what I'm supposedly dissagreeing /agreeing with beyond the fact that mods should look for 10 posts from permbanned pekple that was positive

The mods' line of reasoning on being so permissive with that sort of thread has historically been that sometimes there's a positive result, and it's worth PB being 99% garbage just for the sake of those people. If that's true, then it shouldn't be much of a stretch to find some of those gems.

If it's not worth finding those threads, then the permissiveness itself isn't worth the trouble, either.

GatekeeperTDS1 votes

Who determines what's garbage? They remove anything that doesn't adhere to the universal rules, and anything that's a low-effort rant.

Censorship isn't good just because some people might not like the content. Nobody is forcing any of us to read or participate in any posts.

Karunamon1 votes

{quoted}

But there's a point in allowing toxic players to trash the Boards just for the sake of a handful of people who just needed that one more punishment to reform? You think you're disagreeing with me, but you're actually supporting what I'm saying. :)

I'm going to go ahead and venture a guess that PBM is intended as a containment board of sorts. 99% of the content there is players with legitimate permabans crying about it, and that's a lot of dreck that would make its way into the other sections of the board without its presence there.

KFCeytron1 votes

{quoted}

I'm going to go ahead and venture a guess that PBM is intended as a containment board of sorts. 99% of the content there is players with legitimate permabans crying about it, and that's a lot of dreck that would make its way into the other sections of the board without its presence there.

That is a good possibility, but I suppose mods could never admit to that even if it were true. Still, that's a sort of value, so I'll keep it in mind.

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}That is a good possibility, but I suppose mods could never admit to that even if it were true. Still, that's a sort of value, so I'll keep it in mind.

I mean, PB isn't designed for that, but it's a nice secondary feature we wouldn't want to lose. Similar to how Streams & Videos helps keep General Discussion, Gameplay, and Concepts & Creations free from video spam, Concepts & Creatures keeps Gameplay free of non-official suggestions, and RANT keeps everything slightly more free of anger posts.

It's rarely our primary goal (RANT aside), but it's a very strong secondary advantage that we're more than happy to admit.

KFCeytron1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=qjasOEbd,comment-id=00000000000100000000,timestamp=2019-08-27T14:23:13.196+0000)

I mean, PB isn't designed for that, but it's a nice secondary feature we wouldn't want to lose. Similar to how Streams & Videos helps keep General Discussion, Gameplay, and Concepts & Creations free from video spam, Concepts & Creatures keeps Gameplay free of non-official suggestions, and RANT keeps everything slightly more free of anger posts.

It's rarely our primary goal (RANT aside), but it's a very strong secondary advantage that we're more than happy to admit.

Is there any possibility that Boards might one day allow us to exclude certain sub-Boards from the general listing?

ModThe Djinn1 votes

{quoted}Is there any possibility that Boards might one day allow us to exclude certain sub-Boards from the general listing?

I can't discount the possibility than things may change, but at the moment I am unaware of any plans in this direction and unsure if it's something the volunteer team would be able to implement.

ModUlanopo1 votes

{quoted}

Is there any possibility that Boards might one day allow us to exclude certain sub-Boards from the general listing?

BEK (Boards Enhancement Kit) has a feature to allow you to exclude certain Boards, iirc.

ShyImagoghnar1 votes

{quoted}

Or... They couldn't do that because it's pointless looking for 10 specific posts just for the sake of one person ...

they moderate a meaningless forum for free my guy. you think they've got anything else to do?

Umbral Regent3 votes

If you can find me ten separate Player Behavior threads by ten separate permabanned players where the player asked about their ban, behaved themselves, learned, thanked respondents for teaching them the error of their ways, improved their behavior, reformed, and became an upstanding player/member of the community (flying in the face of Riot's real-world data, mind you), then I will at least be willing to entertain the idea that perhaps those extraordinary cases are worth the absolutely massive amount of chaff.

Fundamentally, I see no legitimate point to this challenge. Players who straighten out after a permanent ban are few and far between, and, yes, more often than not, permabanned players tend to remain belligerent and harmful to the community even after having their punishment explained to them, but everyone has the right to post on PB to ask about their punishment, whether they come to accept it or Riot's rules or not.

But if you can't, then I urge you to stop allowing permabanned toxic assholes to trash that Board, and just instantly delete any thread or comment in PB posted by a permabanned player. Don't permaban them from Boards entirely; just remove anything they post in PB.

And what'll happen then? I'll tell you - those belligerent players will see that the Moderation team is going out of their way to remove posts with any mention of the fact that they were permanently banned, even going so far as to effectively blacklist specific players from PB on that basis, and they're going to make a fuss and cry out in outrage about "Riot's Big Brother-esque censorship".

It's a lose/lose situation, and I think everyone would prefer the lesser of two evils - letting them post on PB and simply correcting them when they present false/inaccurate information is by far and away better than giving them a litany of other reasons to rant and rave across the boards.

And, even in the case that your suggestion was something that could be humored, I can easily see a catch.

If nothing else, the time period covered by ten such posts should show us how often we see such a chimera around here...

No matter the outcome, it looks like your challenge is set up so that you can twist it to make whatever point you want. First it could be "reformed permabanned players are too few", but then failing that, it could just as easily become "reformed permabanned players are too rare an occasion/too far between".

The condition should be singular and explicit. Ten people? Fine. But you gotta look only at the cases, not how spread out they are over time.

And, at the end of the day, this all comes back to one viewpoint distilled into a question;

What's the point of discussing their ban, anyway? It's permanent, and Riot wants those people to quit the game.

And here's the answer;

  1. Explaining to the player what behavior led to their permanent suspension.
  2. Explaining to the player how the system (in the broad strokes) works.
  3. Explaining the players options following a permanent suspension.
  4. Being able to direct the player to the proper channels in the event that their punishment appears to be in error.
  5. Building up a better understanding of the system.
  6. Creating an opportunity to advise the player should they consider reform.

Riot may want those players to leave League of Legends, but ultimately, due to the nature of League as a Free-to-Play game, they can't effectively prevent them from coming back. And if they do come back, don't you think it'd be better if they reform, or at the very least, aren't breaking the rules anymore?

There's plenty of reason to discuss people's permanent bans. Riot's policy against overturning them and their want for those players to leave League do not diminish those reasons.

KFCeytron2 votes

[{quoted}](name=Umbral Regent,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=qjasOEbd,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-08-27T08:49:46.178+0000)

Fundamentally, I see no legitimate point to this challenge. Players who straighten out after a permanent ban are few and far between, and, yes, more often than not, permabanned players tend to remain belligerent and harmful to the community even after having their punishment explained to them, but everyone has the right to post on PB to ask about their punishment, whether they come to accept it or Riot's rules or not.

Right, but my point is to question whether they should have that right. I mean, they don't have the right to play the game anymore. Maybe they should also lose the right to post on PB.

And what'll happen then? I'll tell you - those belligerent players will see that the Moderation team is going out of their way to remove posts with any mention of the fact that they were permanently banned, even going so far as to effectively blacklist specific players from PB on that basis, and they're going to make a fuss and cry out in outrage about "Riot's Big Brother-esque censorship".

It's a lose/lose situation, and I think everyone would prefer the lesser of two evils - letting them post on PB and simply correcting them when they present false/inaccurate information is by far and away better than giving them a litany of other reasons to rant and rave across the boards.

They're already crying like that about Riot's "Big Brother-esque censorship" - sometimes literally, when they claim that chat restrictions infringe on their freedom of speech. Would it be the lesser of two evils to let them continue to ruin matches? Riot bans them, and they mostly don't come back. Maybe if they can't post on PB, they similarly won't come back. I think we should at least attempt to make PB not garbage.

And, even in the case that your suggestion was something that could be humored, I can easily see a catch.

No matter the outcome, it looks like your challenge is set up so that you can twist it to make whatever point you want. First it could be "reformed permabanned players are too few", but then failing that, it could just as easily become "reformed permabanned players are too rare an occasion/too far between".

You think mods shouldn't even try to find positive posts from permabanned players because I might not totally change my mind? And yet we allow those players to post, even though we might not totally change their mind, and they won't change our mind, and all that happens is a bunch of ranting and vote manipulation.

The condition should be singular and explicit. Ten people? Fine. But you gotta look only at the cases, not how spread out they are over time.

Okay. Ten cases and I'll admit that allowing permabanned players to post on PB has enough value to hold off on removing those posts on sight (although I'll still maintain that it's trash overall). Still, people will check the dates of those threads and come to whatever conclusion that evidence supports anyway. I think you'd agree that finding ten such cases within the last week would be substantively different from having to go back to 2013, when these Boards came online.

And, at the end of the day, this all comes back to one viewpoint distilled into a question;

And here's the answer;

  1. Explaining to the player what behavior led to their permanent suspension.
  2. Explaining to the player how the system (in the broad strokes) works.
  3. Explaining the players options following a permanent suspension.
  4. Being able to direct the player to the proper channels in the event that their punishment appears to be in error.
  5. Building up a better understanding of the system.
  6. Creating an opportunity to advise the player should they consider reform.

And my point is that those things don't work for those players. We explain 1 and they say they didn't do anything they think is wrong, we explain 2 and they say it's a stupid system, we explain 3 and they repeat that they want their account back, 4 is just "we can't tell if you were hacked, you have to submit a ticket" (and usually they already have anyway), 5 doesn't happen with permabanned players who keep shouting that everything is unfair/rigged/etc., and 6 is flat-out incorrect, because they no longer have an account on which to reform. Riot does not want permabanned players to create new accounts. Why would we tell them to?

Riot may want those players to leave League of Legends, but ultimately, due to the nature of League as a Free-to-Play game, they can't effectively prevent them from coming back. And if they do come back, don't you think it'd be better if they reform, or at the very least, aren't breaking the rules anymore?

Most permabanned players don't return. And if they do come back, I agree that it'd be better if they reform (which to me is synonymous with not breaking the rules anymore), but they won't. That is why they got a permaban.

There's plenty of reason to discuss people's permanent bans. Riot's policy against overturning them and their want for those players to leave League do not diminish those reasons.

The only practical use I've seen for such discussion is when the only thing someone did was to repeat someone else's ZT phrases in an undirected fashion ("hey, don't call me a --- please"), and those cases are very rare. For the rest, I see no practical reason to discuss a permaban. There are personal reasons, of course - I'm sure some people enjoy putting the smackdown on someone who brings racist/homophobic slurs to a LoL match - but that's not a practical reason, and doesn't justify the situation.

Umbral Regent2 votes

Right, but my point is to question whether they should have that right. I mean, they don't have the right to play the game anymore. Maybe they should also lose the right to post on PB.

Bans in-game and on the boards are separate, as you well know. If they're going to be barred from posting in PB on account of having their account in-game permanently banned, then it may as well extend to the rest of the boards, too.

But, they should have the right to discuss League of Legends on their account whether it's banned in-game or not. If they're banned in-game on that account, then they can no longer break the rules in-game on that account; they may still have an interest in discussing the game, or even discussing their own punishment.

If you want to strip them of their right to post on the boards, you have to have a legitimate reason that their permanent ban in-game should disqualify them that right.

They're already crying like that about Riot's "Big Brother-esque censorship" - sometimes literally, when they claim that chat restrictions infringe on their freedom of speech.

And it would not help to give them further fuel to rant and rave harder. If they're already bad, why make them worse? Why start on a vicious cycle of squelching their opinions, making them angrier and louder, only to silence them further, making them angrier and louder...Ad infinitum?

Riot bans them, and they mostly don't come back. Maybe if they can't post on PB, they similarly won't come back. I think we should at least attempt to make PB not garbage.

If they can't post on PB, they'll go to GD, or RANT, or Discuss the Boards, or elsewhere as long as it's a vaguely similar avenue to discuss their punishment, however fruitless.

It's much the same as the issue with indefinitely-scaling chat restrictions.

You think mods shouldn't even try to find positive posts from permabanned players because I might not totally change my mind?

Considering that, at the end of the day, you've only the power to suggest a course of action and not implement it? They're not obligated to go searching for posts to rise to your challenge.

You want to see players whose accounts in-game are permabanned disallowed from posting in PB. This isn't even close to a good way of tackling the problem it's meant to hit - because there are people who hold strict disagreements with Riot's system and spread misinformation who haven't been permanently banned.

And even if the majority of the issue lay with those permabanned players, taking such a straightforward, "get them out of here" approach would cause more harm than good, even if it did solve the problem in any capacity.

And yet we allow those players to post, even though we might not totally change their mind, and they won't change our mind...

People are allowed to maintain their opinions, even after discourse has resolved. They're allowed to be ignorant and wrong and everything else, subjective or otherwise. Even people I've largely disagreed with have held discussions that have, at the very least, made me think about shit. And some of those discussions were aggravated, heated, and uncivil; only just toeing the line of what was allowed.

We don't need to change people's minds. More often than not, we can't. All we can do, and what we need to do, is get the right information out there and at least let it be seen. People can disagree with it, they can call it bullshit and argue against it 'till the cows come home, but so long as we get the information out, we'll have done our job.

Okay. Ten cases and I'll admit that allowing permabanned players to post on PB has enough value to hold off on removing those posts on sight (although I'll still maintain that it's trash overall).

Believe me when I say I'm working on a list. It'll take plenty of time for me to find other cases, but it's underway.

Still, people will check the dates of those threads and come to whatever conclusion that evidence supports anyway. I think you'd agree that finding ten such cases within the last week would be substantively different from having to go back to 2013, when these Boards came online.

I would agree, yes. But I'm a stickler for the conditions as they're laid out.

And my point is that those things don't work for those players. We explain 1 and they say they didn't do anything they think is wrong, we explain 2 and they say it's a stupid system, we explain 3 and they repeat that they want their account back, 4 is just "we can't tell if you were hacked, you have to submit a ticket" (and usually they already have anyway), 5 doesn't happen with permabanned players who keep shouting that everything is unfair/rigged/etc....

Explaining things may not work for most people. It may only work for one in fifty, one in a hundred, one in a thousand, but so long as there's the possibility that someone will be receptive, it will be worthwhile to explain the punishment and the system to hundreds of belligerent players.

...and 6 is flat-out incorrect, because they no longer have an account on which to reform. Riot does not want permabanned players to create new accounts. Why would we tell them to?

If someone shows an interest in reforming and coming back to the game after a permanent suspension, I see no issue with encouraging them to do so. Yes, Riot wants people to leave when they permaban them, but - we're not Riot. As players, we are at liberty to make our own judgement calls with how we advise other players.

If I see genuine remorse and the potential for someone to reform, I'll tell them they can start afresh - hell, I might even encourage it. I wouldn't see them off flying by the seat of their pants, of course, but the point remains - Riot's goal may be to have them leave, but they cannot feasibly prevent them from coming back, and it ultimately isn't against the rules for them to come back. If they choose to reform, all the power to them.

Most permabanned players don't return. And if they do come back, I agree that it'd be better if they reform (which to me is synonymous with not breaking the rules anymore), but they won't. That is why they got a permaban.

Whether or not they'll reform isn't a certainty. Granted, a lot of players make it abundantly clear just how well their second/third/umpteenth account is going to go, but just because a person got permabanned doesn't mean they're incapable of reforming.

I've seen cases - rare though they may be - where people realized just how shitty their behavior was too little, too late. And I've seen people struggle with reforming after the fact, too. You can't be certain that just because they got a permanent suspension that they can't reform - that's like saying that anyone who spent any amount of time at Honor Level 0-1 will always be toxic and just run their account into the ground.

For the rest, I see no practical reason to discuss a permaban. There are personal reasons, of course - I'm sure some people enjoy putting the smackdown on someone who brings racist/homophobic slurs to a LoL match - but that's not a practical reason, and doesn't justify the situation.

I think getting the information out there and learning from other peoples' mistakes to build a better understanding of how the system works are practical enough reasons to discuss permanent bans. Those are my two biggest reasons, and I figure there are at least a good couple other players on the PB boards who have similar or even different reasons to discuss those punishments as well.

GatekeeperTDS2 votes

You had me up until the religious part. You can do better than that.

Nor do I think removing conversations is a good idea, even if they're shitty conversations. Worth is a subjective thing.

KFCeytron1 votes

{quoted}

You had me up until the religious part. You can do better than that.

Nor do I think removing conversations is a good idea, even if they're shitty conversations. Worth is a subjective thing.

Better than that, like "show me a statistically significant correlation between PB posts from permabanned players and good posts, within a certain time window," etc.? I think asking for a flat number is a lot simpler but still pretty useful.

Worth is subjective, but if we establish certain standards, like practical value, civil discourse, etc. - which the rules do - then it makes objective sense to remove certain kinds of conversations with little worth according to those standards. Viz, the endless rants, threadjacking, and bad advice from permabanned players.

ModUlanopo1 votes

I'm just going to assume you've never heard of the Starfish story:

One day, an old man was walking along a beach that was littered with thousands of starfish that had been washed ashore by the high tide. As he walked he came upon a young boy who was eagerly throwing the starfish back into the ocean, one by one.

Puzzled, the man looked at the boy and asked what he was doing. Without looking up from his task, the boy simply replied, “I’m saving these starfish, Sir”.

The old man chuckled aloud, “Son, there are thousands of starfish and only one of you. What difference can you make?”

The boy picked up a starfish, gently tossed it into the water and turning to the man, said, “I made a difference to that one!”

Silent Gravity1 votes

No longer links to a story, it is now just an announcement that the linked site is closing.

/Edit holy necromancer Batman! I'll be more careful in the future

ModUlanopo1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Silent Gravity,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=qjasOEbd,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2019-09-03T03:59:48.350+0000)

No longer links to a story, it is now just an announcement that the linked site is closing.

/Edit holy necromancer Batman! I'll be more careful in the future

Fixed.

More from Discuss the Boards

More by KFCeytron